If mediocrity means doubling attendances in 18 years then let's have some more please.

But we are going to be blown away by other sports which is a sad reality.

With the NRL turning into a massive league financially, and Union having much more to spend than ourselves we are going to get cherry picked. We can't afford to have our best players just taken away.

The only reason I watched Wigan v Widnes the other day was to watch Tomkins play that was it, he draws crowds and views on the tele. I tend to watch Leeds to see Hardaker, Watkins and Hall play. I've began to want to watch Saints play as Lomax is playing full back. These players are why people watch the game.

In Australia clubs are going to do everything they can to reach success. Where are they going to find good players reasonably cheap? Look straight to SL. It's not as if in the last five years English players have a bad reputation in the NRL. Tomkins could earn half a million dollars a year in the NRL in a year or so, I don't think Michael Maguire would have an issue moving GI to centre and putting in a bid for Tomkins. That's SLs biggest draw gone.

Could Wigan keep Tomkins if they were allowed to? Yes. The SC will prevent this though.

If he goes crowds will decrease. I'm using Tomkins as an example here as he's the easiest to use as an example, but there is many others.

Over the last 18 years 1.7m was enough to just about keep our best players. Now it isn't. We need a change.

But we are going to be blown away by other sports which is a sad reality.

With the NRL turning into a massive league financially, and Union having much more to spend than ourselves we are going to get cherry picked. We can't afford to have our best players just taken away.

The only reason I watched Wigan v Widnes the other day was to watch Tomkins play that was it, he draws crowds and views on the tele. I tend to watch Leeds to see Hardaker, Watkins and Hall play. I've began to want to watch Saints play as Lomax is playing full back. These players are why people watch the game.

In Australia clubs are going to do everything they can to reach success. Where are they going to find good players reasonably cheap? Look straight to SL. It's not as if in the last five years English players have a bad reputation in the NRL. Tomkins could earn half a million dollars a year in the NRL in a year or so, I don't think Michael Maguire would have an issue moving GI to centre and putting in a bid for Tomkins. That's SLs biggest draw gone.

Could Wigan keep Tomkins if they were allowed to? Yes. The SC will prevent this though.

If he goes crowds will decrease. I'm using Tomkins as an example here as he's the easiest to use as an example, but there is many others.

Over the last 18 years 1.7m was enough to just about keep our best players. Now it isn't. We need a change.

Hear Hear - Get the steamroller going. Salford not only had the stars in the 60s they also pulled in the crowds. Snape speculated AND accumulated. People wanted to watch the Stars not the mediocre stuff Salford served up prior to Mr Snape`s vision. Remember Danny Wilson? Tremendous footballer and he put thousands on the gates at Swinton. I repeat the time is now - 8 Millionaires should be pulling the strings and not be getting bogged down by the `chapeaux plat`.

The analogy I would ue is that the clubs are divisons of the same business

What I would say is there's no point in Wigan andLeeds biggest being biggedt and best if the other clubs don't have at least the ambition and the wherewithall to match or surpass them which is a sligtly different angle on wha you are saying. Shoulkd clubs like the Rhinos deliberately underachieve? Not in my book.

Fewer clubs in a more intense, financially buoyant comp would be a start.

Fewer clubs, fewer games, less cash, loss of star players to other competitions/sports, less intense games. Doesn't work does it?

The game doesn't pull enough cash, full stop.

You can fiddle about with any combination you like but until everyone in the game realises its all about bringing in revenue then each combination you come up with will be doomed to bringing in every year this years five year plan.

With the NRL turning into a massive league financially, and Union having much more to spend than ourselves we are going to get cherry picked. We can't afford to have our best players just taken away.

The only reason I watched Wigan v Widnes the other day was to watch Tomkins play that was it, he draws crowds and views on the tele. I tend to watch Leeds to see Hardaker, Watkins and Hall play. I've began to want to watch Saints play as Lomax is playing full back. These players are why people watch the game.

Shurely it's the fine traditions our historic clubs who have been around for 140 years plus have given to the game is why people watch the game? All monies should be used to preserve them

Sarcasm aside only one thing draws the money today. Quality.

I disagree RL will get cherry picked to death (Literally).Australian RL may well back off if they risk becoming a one continent game.RU back off signing too many RL players ( in terms of a planned assault on our game to destroy it)because the Government take the view that the games should co-exist together.

I see no reason we cannot create an elite competition showcasing RL at it's best. But it has to be created in a radical and ruthless way, RFL/SLE has to create a real Superleague.

I think we do have just enough resources to do this. A 14 club elite should be what we create and build upon, with every penny we can generate going to it, and with everyone in the game backing this.

Fewer clubs, fewer games, less cash, loss of star players to other competitions/sports, less intense games. Doesn't work does it?

Oh yes. It's that simple isn't it. Sorry.

Maybe, just maybe, there are people at the RFL who can work out a fixture format for the season that works for the game, regardless of how many teams are in the elite comp. Whether that's by expanding the world club challenge, incorporating more rep rugby or simply veering away from a straight home and away draw, I suspect it's do-able.

Maybe, just maybe, there are people at the RFL who can work out a fixture format for the season that works for the game, regardless of how many teams are in the elite comp. Whether that's by expanding the world club challenge, incorporating more rep rugby or simply veering away from a straight home and away draw, I suspect it's do-able.

I take both your points.

I see the 14 club 26 round SL as being commercially the best.

Outside this e.g. Challenge cup or play offs fans don't want to know as much.

Drop to 12 or 10 and you start getting the three league games and we may meet you another three times syndrome.

Every single resource the northern hemisphere can find must (IMHO) go into a 14 club flagship.

Maybe, just maybe, there are people at the RFL who can work out a fixture format for the season that works for the game, regardless of how many teams are in the elite comp. Whether that's by expanding the world club challenge, incorporating more rep rugby or simply veering away from a straight home and away draw, I suspect it's do-able.

Actually it is that simple.

We've had fewer clubs and 3rd fixtures, we've had various combinations. None of them addressed the overall problem of the game as a whole of bringing in more cash.

It isn't simple to bring in more cash, so we fiddle about with fixture structures, because its simple.

The reality is simply that we should concentrate all our efforts on how we bring in money to the game as a whole, restructures of leagues, swapping skint clubs for other skint clubs and clinging to 'tradition' doesn't put pound notes in the bank, though selling tradition does even though you don't have to hang on to this misused concept. You can sell 'traditional' shirts but you don't have to play in them.

Shurely it's the fine traditions our historic clubs who have been around for 140 years plus have given to the game is why people watch the game? All monies should be used to preserve them

Sarcasm aside only one thing draws the money today. Quality.

I disagree RL will get cherry picked to death (Literally).Australian RL may well back off if they risk becoming a one continent game.RU back off signing too many RL players ( in terms of a planned assault on our game to destroy it)because the Government take the view that the games should co-exist together.

I see no reason we cannot create an elite competition showcasing RL at it's best. But it has to be created in a radical and ruthless way, RFL/SLE has to create a real Superleague.

I think we do have just enough resources to do this. A 14 club elite should be what we create and build upon, with every penny we can generate going to it, and with everyone in the game backing this.

I disagree that Australia won't cherry pick England at the risk of it becoming a one continent game. Firstly the aussies regard SOO just as if not more important than the international game, secondly how will it create a one continent game? If anything it'll make the national side stronger.

Its obvious we need money to create a 14 team 'Super' League. A club floundering at the bottom of the league is in a position to put millions into the game and its being prevented due to the salary cap.

Let's say Koukash spent 2.5m on a squad for one season (fairly realistic) all that money isn't lost to wage inflation. Salfords crowds will increase if they win and income is returned.

If Salford have a winning side, a rich owner who creates media attention, a very smart and efficient ground, are being marketed properly they have the potential to get 10k and pay the full cap and be sustainable.

But back to the point of our top players getting cherry picked. You make the point of that pro players don't grow on trees. Who are going to replace the players if they leave? If the better players are leaving players will follow suit. As will the crowds. Once the players are gone they aren't coming back. It'll be a downwards spiral which could damage what our game has been trying to build for the last 18 years.

Hear Hear - Get the steamroller going. Salford not only had the stars in the 60s they also pulled in the crowds. Snape speculated AND accumulated. People wanted to watch the Stars not the mediocre stuff Salford served up prior to Mr Snape`s vision. Remember Danny Wilson? Tremendous footballer and he put thousands on the gates at Swinton. I repeat the time is now - 8 Millionaires should be pulling the strings and not be getting bogged down by the `chapeaux plat`.

Why do you assume that they would all be willing to spend more cash?

While the Snape era was fantastic on the field, what progress was made in developing infrastructure?

If you cut to 12 or even 10 teams, where does the shortfall in cash come from to pay all these elite players more money to keep them out of the grip of our competitors.

Just explain, in some detail, who is going to pay for this big idea, the cash has to be up front, otherwise we just change for changing's sake.

For a start, the central funding pot would be split 10/12 ways rather than 14.

Add to this the fact that some clubs have already stated that they want to be able to spend above the current cap in order to retain the best players. At present, the cap artificially restricts this in order to achieve some sort of parity (although some would argue it simply dumbs the competition down).

Ps, you still haven't provided an adequate explanation as to why fewer clubs would lead to a "shortfall"

Its obvious we need money to create a 14 team 'Super' League. A club floundering at the bottom of the league is in a position to put millions into the game and its being prevented due to the salary cap.Let's say Koukash spent 2.5m on a squad for one season (fairly realistic) all that money isn't lost to wage inflation. Salfords crowds will increase if they win and income is returned.

It cannot be as simple as that with respect. who does Koukash buy to improve his squad?

If he buys stars off other clubs how does that help them continue to draw their crowds?

In the musical chairs world of a limited resource game, once the music stops Salford can sit down again, but another club may be stood bemused.

For a start, the central funding pot would be split 10/12 ways rather than 14.

Add to this the fact that some clubs have already stated that they want to be able to spend above the current cap

A drop to 12 will give clubs £184,000 more a season each.

A drop to 10 clubs will give clubs £436,000 more a season.

I can't think of any more than a couple of club chairmen who have stated they "want" to spend significantly more.

An extended WCC is just an idea, not a reality, but the SLE big wigs are courting Toulouse so I think this idea you raise is the favourite one to happen. Maybe SLE are hoping the civic and aerospace riches Toulouse promise only after they get their SL licence will see them raid Union and NRL?

Salford not only had the stars in the 60s they also pulled in the crowds. Snape speculated AND accumulated. 8 Millionaires should be pulling the strings and not be getting bogged down by the `chapeaux plat`.

Snape took boot money "amateur" stars of Rugby Union. It didn't last long and they didn't win much.

The eight Snapes you refer to will all need to pop a few million a year each into their clubs and hope that the RU stars they will be chasing don't value the international RU game.

I'm now at a loss to see which RU stars would do any good in our game and draw the crowds?

The analogy I would ue is thsat the clubs are divisons of the same business

What I would say is there's no point in Wigan andLeeds biggest and best if the other clubs don't have at least the ambition and the wherewithall to match or surpass them which is a sligtly different angle on wha you are saying. Shoulkd clubs like the Rhinos deliberately underachieve? Not in my book.

I'm not suggesting the Rhinos try to deliberately underachieve. I'm asking that they and others make decisions that are beneficial to the league as a whole and not just Leeds Rhinos. I'm asking that clubs lose the "I'm alright Jack" attitude and see the bigger picture.

You can fiddle about with any combination you like but until everyone in the game realises its all about bringing in revenue then each combination you come up with will be doomed to bringing in every year this years five year plan.

Totally agree. And artificially propping the league up with sugar daddy's money is a house built on sand.

I'm not suggesting the Rhinos try to deliberately underachieve. I'm asking that they and others make decisions that are beneficial to the league as a whole and not just Leeds Rhinos. I'm asking that clubs lose the "I'm alright Jack" attitude and see the bigger picture.

I think for that to happen more central control woul be needed rgsrding the way clubs are run: as in the US, with stricter controls ove who is allowed into the competiton. I guess I'm talking about franchising.